[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19174-19177]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7199]



[[Page 19174]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-848]


Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of 
China: Notice of Final Results And Rescission, In Part, of 2004/2005 
Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 10, 2006, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published the preliminary results of its administrative 
and new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on freshwater 
crawfish tail meat from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). See 
Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of the 2004/2005 
Administrative and New Shipper Reviews, 71 FR 59432 (October 10, 2006) 
(Preliminary Results). Based on our analysis of the record, including 
information obtained since the preliminary results, we have made 
changes to the margin calculations for Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd. 
(``Xiping Opeck''), Xuzhou Jinjiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. (``Xuzhou 
Jinjiang'') and Qingdao Jinyongxiang Aquatic Foods Co., Ltd. (``Qingdao 
JYX''). See Final Results of Review section, below.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 17, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scot Fullerton or Erin Begnal, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1386 or (202) 482-1442, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On October 10, 2006, the Department published the preliminary 
results of its administrative and new shipper reviews of the 
antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC, 
and invited parties to comment on the preliminary results. See 
Preliminary Results. The administrative review covers six exporters or 
producer/exporters: (1) Jiangsu Jiushoutang Organisms-Manufactures Co., 
Ltd. (``Jiangsu JOM''); (2) Shanghai Sunbeauty Trading Co., Ltd. 
(``Shanghai Sunbeauty''); (3) Qingdao JYX; and (4) Qingdao Wentai 
Trading Co., Ltd. (``Qingdao Wentai''); (5) Yancheng Hi-King 
Agriculture Developing Co., Ltd. (``Yancheng Hi-King''); and (6) Xuzhou 
Jinjiang.\1\ The period of review (``POR'') for all respondents subject 
to this administrative review is September 1, 2004, through August 31, 
2005.\2\ The new shipper review covers two producer/exporters: (1) 
Xiping Opeck; and (2) Xuzhou Jinjiang. The period of review for Xiping 
Opeck is September 1, 2004, through August 31, 2005, while the period 
of review for Xuzhou Jinjiang is September 1, 2004, through October 5, 
2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Xuzhou Jinjiang is a participant in both the administrative 
review and new shipper review.
    \2\ On July 3, 2006, the Department issued its notice of 
rescission of antidumping duty new shipper reviews of Jiangsu JOM, 
Shanghai Sunbeauty and Qingdao Wentai, for the period September 1, 
2004, and February 28, 2005. See Notice of Rescission of Antidumping 
Duty New Shipper Reviews: Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Republic of China, 71 FR 37902 (July 3, 2006) (``Rescission 
of New Shipper Review''). Accordingly, this administrative review 
only covers these companies' entries not already covered by the 
above-referenced new shipper reviews. Therefore, this administrative 
review, for Jiangsu JOM, Shanghai Sunbeauty and Qingdao Wentai, 
covers entries from March 1, 2005, through August 31, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 30, 2006, subsequent to the issuance of the Preliminary 
Results, the Department received publicly available information, for 
purposes of valuing factors of production, from the Crawfish Processors 
Alliance, the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry, and Bob 
Odom, Commissioner (collectively, ``Domestic Parties''), pursuant to 19 
CFR 351.301(c)(3). See Letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce, from 
Domestic Parties, regarding Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Republic of China: 2004-05 Administrative Review (October 30, 
2006); see also Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's 
Republic of China: 2004-05 New Shipper Review (October 30, 2006). On 
November 9, 2006, Xuzhou Jinjiang submitted rebuttal surrogate value 
information responding to Domestic Parties' October 30, 2006, surrogate 
value information. See Letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce, from 
Xuzhou Jinjiang, regarding Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Rep. of China; Surrogate Value Rebuttal (November 9, 2006).
    On November 9, 2006, the Department also received case briefs from 
Domestic Parties as well as Xuzhou Jinjiang. See Case Brief from 
Domestic Parties, regarding Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Republic of China: 2004-05 Administrative Review (November 9, 
2006), Case Brief from Domestic Parties, regarding Freshwater Crawfish 
Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China: 2004-05 New Shipper 
Review (November 9, 2006), Case Brief from Xuzhou Jinjiang, regarding 
Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic Of China; 
Comment on the Preliminary Results (November 9, 2006). Additionally, on 
November 14, 2006, we received rebuttal briefs from Domestic Parties 
and Xuzhou Jinjiang. See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the 
People's Republic of China: Petitioner's Rebuttal Brief (April 14, 
2006); see also Rebuttal Brief from Domestic Parties, regarding 
Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China: 
2004-05 New Shipper Review (November 14, 2006); and Rebuttal Brief from 
Xuzhou Jinjiang, regarding Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Rep. Of China; Comment on the Preliminary Results (November 
14, 2006). No case briefs were submitted by Jiangsu JOM, Shanghai 
Sunbeauty, or Qingdao Wentai. Although petitioners initially requested 
a hearing in the administrative and new shipper reviews, this request 
was subsequently withdrawn.
    On February 2, 2007, the Department placed revised expected non-
market economy (``NME'') wage rates on its website, (see http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/index.html) and offered interested parties an 
opportunity to submit comments on these revised wage rates, as the 
period for submission of case briefs and rebuttal briefs had already 
passed. On February 7, 2007, Xuzhou Jinjiang submitted comments on the 
revised wage rates. See Xuzhou Jinjiang Wage Rate Comments, dated 
February 7, 2007. No other comments on the revised wage rates were 
submitted.

Scope of Order

    The product covered by this antidumping duty order is freshwater 
crawfish tail meat, in all its forms (whether washed or with fat on, 
whether purged or unpurged), grades, and sizes; whether frozen, fresh, 
or chilled; and regardless of how it is packed, preserved, or prepared. 
Excluded from the scope of the order are live crawfish and other whole 
crawfish, whether boiled, frozen, fresh, or chilled. Also excluded are 
saltwater crawfish of any type, and parts thereof. Freshwater crawfish 
tail meat is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 1605.40.10.10 and 
1605.40.10.90, which are the HTSUS numbers for prepared foodstuffs, 
indicating peeled crawfish tail meat and other, as introduced by U.S. 
Customs

[[Page 19175]]

and Border Protection (``CBP'') in 2000, and HTSUS numbers 
0306.19.00.10 and 0306.29.00.00, which are reserved for fish and 
crustaceans in general. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the 
scope of this order is dispositive.

Separate Rates

    Qingdao JYX, Xiping Opeck, and Xuzhou Jinjiang have requested 
separate, company-specific antidumping duty rates. In our preliminary 
results, we found that Qingdao JYX, Xiping Opeck, and Xuzhou Jinjiang 
had met the criteria for the application of a separate antidumping duty 
rate. See Preliminary Results. We have not received any information 
since the Preliminary Results with respect to Qingdao JYX, Xiping 
Opeck, and Xuzhou Jinjiang which would warrant reconsideration of our 
separate-rates determinations with respect to these companies. 
Therefore, for these final results, we will continue to calculate 
company-specific separate rates for these respondents.

Partial Rescission of Administrative Review

    In the Preliminary Results, the Department stated its intention to 
partially rescind the administrative review for Yancheng Hi-King, as 
the firm informed the Department that it did not export the subject 
merchandise to the United States during the POR. The Department also 
stated its intention to rescind the administrative review for Qingdao 
Wentai, as the Department determined that Qingdao Wentai's single sale, 
covered by both the new shipper review and administrative review, was 
not bona fide and could not serve as the basis for the calculation of a 
dumping margin. See Rescission of New Shipper Review. No comments on 
the Department's intention to rescind the administrative review for 
Yancheng Hi-King and Qingdao Wentai were submitted by any interested 
party. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, we are rescinding the 
administrative review with respect to Yancheng Hi-King and Qingdao 
Wentai. See 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).

Adverse Facts Available - Jiangsu JOM & Shanghai Sunbeauty

    For purposes of the Preliminary Results, the Department applied 
facts available to sales by Jiangsu JOM and Shanghai Sunbeauty, as 
Jiangsu JOM would not permit the Department to verify information 
placed on the record, and Shanghai Sunbeauty informed the Department 
that it would not participate further in this review and did not 
respond to the Department's requests for information. Therefore, we 
determined that neither company cooperated to the best of its ability. 
See Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, from Christopher D. Riker, 
Program Manager, regarding Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Application of Adverse Facts 
Available to Shanghai Sunbeauty Trading Co., Ltd., dated October 2, 
2006, and Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, from Christopher D. 
Riker, Program Manager, regarding Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from 
the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Application of Adverse 
Facts Available to Jiangsu Jiushoutang Organisms-Manufacturers Co., 
Ltd., dated October 2, 2006. No comments on this determination were 
submitted by any interested party. Therefore, for the reasons stated 
above, we find it appropriate, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(D) and 
776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), to use 
adverse facts available (``AFA'') as the basis for the final results of 
review for Jiangsu JOM and Shanghai Sunbeauty, which are part of the 
PRC-wide entity, as the Department was unable to verify Jiangsu JOM's 
and Shanghai Sunbeauty's questionnaire responses concerning their 
eligibility for a separate rate. Consistent with the statute, court 
precedent, and its normal practice, the Department has assigned the 
rate of 223.01 percent, the highest rate on the record of any segment 
of the proceeding, to the PRC-wide entity (including Shanghai Sunbeauty 
and Jiangsu JOM) as AFA. See, e.g., Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From 
the People's Republic of China: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review, and Final Partial Rescission of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review, 67 FR 19546 (April 22, 2002). As discussed 
further below, this rate has been corroborated.

Corroboration of Secondary Information

    Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies 
on the facts otherwise available and on ``secondary information,'' the 
Department shall, to the extent practicable, corroborate that 
information from independent sources reasonably at the Department's 
disposal. To ``corroborate'' means to determine that the information 
used has probative value. See Statement of Administrative Action 
(``SAA'') accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), 
H.R. Rep. No. 103-316 at 870 (1994). The Department has determined that 
to have probative value, information must be reliable and relevant. See 
SAA at 870; see also Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, 
Finished and Unfinished from Japan, 61 FR 57391, 57392 (November 6, 
1996). The SAA also states that independent sources used to corroborate 
such evidence may include, for example, published price lists, official 
import statistics and customs data, and information obtained from 
interested parties during the particular investigation. See Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: High and Ultra-High 
Voltage Ceramic Station Post Insulators from Japan, 68 FR 35627 (June 
16, 2003), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value: High and Ultra-High Voltage Ceramic Station Post 
Insulators from Japan, 68 FR 62560 (November 5, 2003); and Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Live Swine from Canada, 
70 FR 12181 (March 11, 2005).
    The reliability of the AFA rate was determined by the calculation 
of the margin based on sales and production data of a respondent in a 
prior review, and on the most appropriate surrogate value information 
available to the Department, chosen from submissions by the parties in 
that review, as well as information gathered by the Department itself. 
Furthermore, the calculation of this margin was subject to comment from 
interested parties in the proceeding Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from 
the People's Republic of China: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Revew, and Final Partial Rescission of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review, 67 FR 19546 (April 22, 2002) (``1999-2000 
Review''). The Department has received no information to date that 
warrants revisiting the issue of the reliability of the rate 
calculation itself. This rate has been used as AFA in every subsequent 
segment of this proceeding and the Department has received no comments 
challenging the reliability of the margin. No information has been 
presented in the current review. Thus, the Department finds that the 
margin calculated in the 1999-2000 review is reliable.
    With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, the 
Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal to 
determine whether a margin continues to have relevance. Where 
circumstances indicate that the selected margin is not appropriate as 
AFA, the Department will disregard the margin and determine an 
appropriate margin. For example, in Fresh Cut Flowers from

[[Page 19176]]

Mexico: Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review, 61 FR 6812 
(February 22, 1996), the Department disregarded the highest margin in 
that case as adverse best information available (the predecessor to 
facts available) because the margin was based on another company's 
uncharacteristic business expense resulting in an unusually high 
margin. Similarly, the Department does not apply a margin that has been 
discredited. See D & L Supply Co. v. United States, 113 F.3d 1220, 1221 
(Fed. Cir. 1997) (the Department will not use a margin that has been 
judicially invalidated). None of these unusual circumstances are 
present here. As there is no information on the record of this review 
that indicates that this rate is not relevant as AFA for the PRC-wide 
entity, we determine that this rate is relevant. Because the rate is 
both reliable and relevant it has probative value. Accordingly, we 
determine that the highest rate determined in any segment of this 
administrative proceeding (i.e., 223.01 percent) is corroborated (i.e., 
it has probative value).

Analysis of Comments Received

    In the case and rebuttal briefs received from the parties after the 
Preliminary Results, we received comments on the surrogate values used 
to value labor, overhead, selling, general and administrative expenses 
(``SG&A''), and profit. We also received comments regarding the bona 
fides of Xuzhou Jinjiang's POR sales. Moreover, we received additional 
comments from Xuzhou Jinjiang in response to the Department's February 
2, 2007, request for comments on the revised expected NME wage rates. 
All issues raised in the case briefs and wage rate comments are 
addressed in the Memorandum to David Spooner, Assistant Secretary for 
Import Administration, from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, regarding Issues and Decision 
Memorandum for the Final Results in the 2004/2005 Administrative and 
New Shipper Reviews of Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's 
Republic of China (April 9, 2007) (``Issues and Decision Memorandum''), 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues raised, 
all of which are in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to 
this notice as Appendix I. Parties can find a complete discussion of 
all issues raised in the briefs and the corresponding recommendations 
in this public memorandum on file in the Central Records Unit 
(``CRU''), room B-099 of the Herbert H. Hoover Building. In addition, a 
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed 
directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov. The paper copy and 
electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical 
in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on the comments received from the interested parties, we have 
made changes to the margin calculations for Qingdao JYX, Xiping Opeck, 
and Xuzhou Jinjiang. For the final results, we have updated the 
surrogate value for labor. For a discussion of these changes, see the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following antidumping duty margins exist:

               Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the PRC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-Average
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (Percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qingdao Jinyongxiang Aquatic Foods Co., Ltd.........               50.98
Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd..........................               34.85
Xuzhou Jinjiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.................                0.00
PRC-wide Rate(including Jiangsu Jiushoutang                       223.01
 Organisms-Manufactures Co., Ltd. and Shanghai
 Sunbeauty Trading Co., Ltd.).......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For details on the calculation of the antidumping duty margin for 
Qingdao JYX, Xiping Opeck, and Xuzhou Jinjiang, see Memorandum to the 
File, through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager from Scot 
Fullerton, Senior International Trade Analyst, regarding Freshwater 
Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China - Analysis 
Memorandum for the Final Results of Administrative Review of Qingdao 
Jinyongxiang Aquatic Foods Co., Ltd. (April, 9, 2007), Memorandum to 
the File, through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, from Erin 
Begnal, Senior International Trade Analyst, regarding Freshwater 
Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China - Analysis 
Memorandum for the Final Results of New Shipper Review of Xiping Opeck 
Food Co., Ltd. (April, 9, 2007), and Memorandum to the File, through 
Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, from Scot Fullerton, Senior 
International Trade Analyst, regarding Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat 
From the People's Republic of China - Analysis Memorandum for the Final 
Results of New Shipper Review of Xuzhou Jinjiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. 
(April, 9, 2007). Public versions of these memoranda are on file in the 
CRU.

Assessment of Antidumping Duties

    The Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping 
duties on all appropriate entries. The Department will issue 
appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of 
publication of the final results of this review. For assessment 
purposes for companies with a calculated rate, where possible, the 
Department calculated importer-specific assessment rates for freshwater 
crawfish tail meat from the PRC on a per-unit basis. Specifically, the 
Department divided the total dumping margins (calculated as the 
difference between normal value and export price) for each importer by 
the total quantity of subject merchandise sold to that importer during 
the POR to calculate a per-unit assessment amount. The Department will 
direct CBP to assess importer-specific assessment rates based on the 
resulting per-unit (i.e., per-kilogram) rates by the weight in 
kilograms of each entry of the subject merchandise during the POR.

Cash Deposits

    The following cash-deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results for shipments of the subject 
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after the publication date of the final results, as provided by section 
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) for subject merchandise exported by 
Qingdao JYX, Xiping Opeck, and Xuzhou Jinjiang, we will establish a 
per-kilogram cash deposit rate which will be equivalent to the company-
specific weighted-average margin established in this review; (2) the 
cash-deposit rate for PRC exporters

[[Page 19177]]

who received a separate rate in a prior segment of the proceeding will 
continue to be the rate assigned in that segment of the proceeding; (3) 
for all other PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been 
found to be entitled to a separate rate (including Shanghai Sunbeauty 
and Jiangsu JOM), the cash-deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 
223.01 percent; (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise, 
the cash-deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter 
that supplied that exporter.
    These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect 
until publication of the final results of the next administrative 
review.

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    These reviews and notice are in accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 
751(a)(2) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

    Dated: April 9, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I

General Issues

Comment 1: Surrogate Financial Ratios
Comment 2: Surrogate Wage Rate

Company-Specific Issues

Comment 3: Bona Fides of Xuzhou Jinjiang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.'s Sales
[FR Doc. E7-7199 Filed 4-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S